Is the use of reCAPTCHA GDPR-compliant?

Good spot, the real [Deutsche] "Gesellschaft für Datenschutz" seems to be: https://www.gdd.de

With a non-compliant cookie banner to start with...

Wow, nice catch, I've flagged it.

Oh thank you, I did not notice that.

> Based on proof-of-work mechanisms and advanced risk signals

> Friendly Captcha does not depend on tracking your users and exploiting personal data.

What "advanced risk signals" are these that do not involve tracking (or fingerprinting) users?

It's not really clear how it'd prevent bots...

> The difficulty of the puzzle, and therefore the time and resources needed to solve it, is intelligently and automatically scaled based on sophisticated risk signals to protect against advanced bots. Friendly Captcha is completely invisible and require no manual user challenge at all.

So... magic?

What about hcaptcha? Wasn’t it supposed to be a less intrusive alternative?

Deliberate choice by the company trying to take your data. They don't have to do that, they want you to be pissed off with the wrong people.

The wall of text is horrible UI, but at least there's a checkbox with an obvious label:

"Do not sell or share my personal information (CCPA/CPRA)."

Most other websites try to hide this fundamental choice from you behind dialogs and endless options. (And of course outside the EU you don't even get to control this, your data will always be collected and sold.)

I'm using materialistic on Android to scroll hn, and sometimes the article shows as black.

And it's in German right?

Try to switch off js.

Was it gdpr compliant at least

That's 90% of the times you even see it :)

Currently YouTube is blocked at work without a Google login, and Chrome keeps demanding and successfully convincing individuals operating shared PCs to stay logged in on a browser session indefinitely.

> 90% of the time I’m getting the Please select all stairs bullshit.

Just yesterday it had me clicking all squares with motorcycles in it. I failed five consecutive times before it let me through.

Almost started to doubt myself.

I’d just selfhost a PoW captcha like https://mcaptcha.org/ – should be fine for most applications.

A similar argument was tried with 'we sell all users data because otherwise we would not be able to run the service, thus we have a legitimate interest.' It did not fly there either.

A service does not have a right to exist. The user has a right to privacy. The users right to privacy trumps the services want to exist. Not to mention that, yeah, there are ways to get similar or better blocking for free, if you have some technical chops at least. I wouldn't fault a small blog for using googles captcha (although the need is questionable), but any company with at least a few employees should be able to figure this out at a relatively trivial cost.

There's a massive difference between your personally identifiable information visible to people who physically pass by versus people all over the world + various automated tools.

Also you're making a difference between license plates and doorbell names where there is no difference; it's only muddying the waters. The only difference is: visible to people physically close by is ok, visible on internet is not ok.

Germany... A place where you cannot publish a photo without permission from every person whose face is visible in it and yet people walk around with their faces uncovered all the time...

False equivalence. Having your name on your own doorbell is a choice.

Germany also requires an imprint with name and address on any non-personal website. Non-Personal can basically mean anything beyond a purely personal blog without comments or anything.